Turning Earth to Venus

Cartoon by Gou Ben; Poem by Long Yuan

Trump decided to withdraw from the Paris accord.
A Venus-like state, Earth’s climate is marching toward.
Hawking’s warning to humankind,
Is to not let self-interest cloud your mind.
Humanity is close to the point of no return,
And some seem content to watch the world burn.
Super-hot sulfurous acid rain.
Will bring humanity a lot of pain.
Where can we all go to escape?
Will a home on a new planet fate?
Heads of 20 states gathered in Germany,
Discussing how to avoid the calamity.
The 19-to-1 vote is obvious to all,
Yet, Trump refuses to admit his fault.

Note: In an interview with BBC News, English physicist Stephen Hawking recently blasted President Donald Trump’s decision to exit the Paris climate agreement, saying “We are close to the tipping point where global warming becomes irreversible. Trump’s action could push the Earth over the brink, to become like Venus, with a temperature of two hundred and fifty degrees, and raining sulfuric acid.”

---

The decision by US President Donald Trump to withdraw from the Paris Agreement has cast a pall of uncertainty about the efforts to combat global climate change.

However, the Paris mechanism will continue to function with or without the participation of the United States. But the objections raised against the pact also require the world to confront the challenges and not be overly optimistic about the ability of the signatories to achieve emission reduction goals ahead of time.

 

Attention effects
Trump’s stances toward climate change are based on the self-interested slogan of “America First” rather than scientific facts and the consensus of the international community. The decision-making style of Donald Trump aims to create a large spectacle that attracts the attention of the people. It is reasonable to assume that Trump is aware of the fact that whether or not the United States chose to withdraw, it would not change the way the winds are blowing with regard to climate change.

The US position in the international climate governance means that it cannot veto the Paris Agreement. The Kyoto Protocol had a higher threshold for entering into force. The protocol required the ratification of no fewer than 55 Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This included the Annex I parties, made up of industrialized countries and economies in transition, which accounted in total for at least 55 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the parties included in Annex I. The US accounted for 36 percent of the total carbon dioxide emissions of the parties included in Annex I in 1990. Though it was not ratified by the US, the protocol still entered into force in 2005.  

The Paris Agreement, on the other hand, has a relatively lower threshold. Currently, the United States accounts for 16 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. The agreement requires the ratification of no fewer than 55 parties that produce at least 55 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.

The agreement reduced the possibility of obstruction by the industrialized parties because non-Annex I parties accounted for about 58 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.
 

 

The United States nearly had veto rights before the Kyoto Protocol entered into force, but it could not stop the protocol. How can the United States expect to dominate the course of climate governance when the international framework of climate change has undergone multi-polarization and fundamental changes?

In addition, unlike the legal mechanism established by the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement adopts the mechanism of Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), allowing each country to submit a voluntary target reduction objective.

The Paris Agreement adopts global, strategic and holistic objectives and mechanisms. There are neither explicit articles targeting specific parties nor any kinds of penalties. The compulsory emission-reduction target stated in the Kyoto Protocol was partially implemented despite the resistance from the United States. It can be predicted that the “voluntary” emission-reduction target agreed upon in the Paris Agreement will be implemented more easily.

Last of all, the cost gap between zero-carbon energy and fossil fuels is closing. Fossil fuels continue to lose their competitive advantages. And replacing coal with low-carbon fossil fuels also advances the goals of emission reduction.

The United States has greatly benefited from the “shale gas revolution.” Energy transformation and technological progress have contributed to the decline in the US primary energy consumption.

In recent years, China’s total consumption of coal has been dropping. China is outpacing the rest of the world in its expansion of renewables use, and it is also a world leader in the development of renewable technology.

 

Concerns, confidences
The fact that Trump’s decision caused widespread concerns indicates people have been hoping the United States would join hands with the world in pushing forward climate governance under the framework of the Paris Agreement.

The United States was the country with the largest cumulative carbon emission in history. It also is and will be the second-largest producer of greenhouse gases for quite a long time in the future. People are concerned that Trump’s decision will compromise international political willingness to address global climate change. In reality, the international community has expressed their explicit disagreement with Trump’s decision and reaffirmed their commitment to implementing the Paris Agreement.

The concern about financing for climate governance is practical. China announced it would provide 20 billion yuan ($3 billion) to support South-South cooperation on climate, while the United States promised to provide $3 billion. Considering that China’s income per capita is less than one-sixth that of the United States, the financial contribution of the United States is relatively small.         

Despite its withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol, the United States still took a low-carbon path of development. Total emissions and per capita emissions of the United States both dropped. Low-carbon development is the main trend as well as a primary source of competitiveness. The local governments and private sector in the United States will not refuse to follow a path that confers on them a competitive advantage.

There is also concern that development of low-carbon technologies will be slowed. However, the Paris Agreement has called the tune for the market, and the “invisible hand” will still guide investors, entrepreneurs and society to increase investment in low-carbon technologies.
 

 

After the United States withdraws from the agreement, the absence of leadership in global climate governance should be addressed. Emerging economies cannot fill this void. But if they work together with the European Union and other developing countries, the fight against climate change under the framework of the Paris Agreement will not falter, nor will it be terminated.

 

Responsibilities
After the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement, many in the international community turned their eyes to China with the expectation that it could fill the vacuum in leadership. Many people from China also suggest that the US withdrawal creates an opportunity for China to lead global climate governance.

Although the European Union does not have the leadership of dominant status, it definitely plays a guiding role. As a relatively underdeveloped emerging economy with high emissions and a tremendous need for emission, India is also important for promoting the course of climate governance designed by the Paris Agreement. If India and other developing countries are not promised concrete financial and technological support or these promises are not honored, they will either continue to press other parties to satisfy their demands or slow down their implementation of the agreement rather than simply withdraw as the United States did.
 

 

As the only country with a relatively monopolistic status in dominating the international climate governance, the United States will not give up its leadership. Historically, after explicitly rejecting the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, the United States initiated the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate to mitigate the influence of the Kyoto Protocol. In the meantime, the United States also kept its discourse platforms within the meetings of parties to the protocol. In future climate negotiations, the United States will probably take a similar approach in participating in the Paris Agreement and return to the course of climate change prevention designed by the agreement when the time is right.

China should actively implement its NDC and achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement as well as the improvement of the international system of climate governance by conducting bilateral and multilateral cooperation. In addition, China should support other developing countries in low-carbon development and addressing climate change by providing finance to projects with market prospects through Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, BRICS New Development Bank and other financial institutions.

   
Pan Jiahua is the director-general of the Institute of Urban and Environmental Studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. He used to serve as a senior economist of the Expert Meeting on the Sectoral Economic Costs and Benefits of GHG Mitigation under the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.